Your Rights in Plain English Ruth Skölmli RIP

Your Rights in Plain English Ruth Skölmli RIP

Meet Ruth Skölmli and hear her simple explanation of your rights and law versus LEGAL

RIP Ruth-Replay interview w Ruth Skölmli-Your Rights in Plain English.

The discussion revolves around the concept of personal sovereignty as introduced by Ruth, emphasizing self-governance and the importance of understanding common law principles, confronting trespasses on personal peace, and challenging legal authorities, while also acknowledging the potential challenges and consequences.


Summary

Main Topics

Ruth Scholey's Influence and Legacy

• Ruth Scholey introduced the concept of sovereignty to Tess Laurie, emphasizing self-determination and self-governance over one's body, mind, and spirit.
• She played a significant role in promoting sovereignty within the health freedom movement, highlighting its interconnection with optimal health.
• Her influence extended to the Better Way Charter's principle of acting honorably and doing no harm.


Ruth Scholey's Approach and Character

• Despite her gentle demeanor, Ruth was a strong advocate for justice and truth within the sovereignty movement.
• She was known for her bravery in standing up for truth and justice despite being timid about public speaking.
• Her approach to discussing sovereignty was gentle yet substantive, making people believe in her message.


Empowerment through Education on Sovereignty

• Ruth created an accessible course on sovereignty with 10-minute modules aimed at empowering individuals from all walks of life.
• The course is available on her website 'Sovereign Natural Empowerment,' encouraging everyone to become sovereign individuals.
• Tess Laurie encourages people to explore this course as part of Ruth's lasting legacy.


Sovereign state of mind and individual responsibility

• Emphasizes the importance of maintaining a sovereign state of mind to understand laws and rights.

• Advocates for holding individuals accountable for their actions, especially in local communities.

• Encourages challenging claims made by others, such as the requirement to wear masks, by asking for proof.


Confrontation, conflict, and fighting for peace

• Discusses the need to confront trespasses upon personal peace without escalating into conflict.

• Highlights the necessity to fight for peace when faced with breaches of personal liberty.
• Stresses that avoiding confrontation can lead to larger societal issues.


Common law, constitution, and legal system

• Explores common law as derived from natural law and social contracts within different regions.
• Criticizes legal education's lack of emphasis on constitutional rights like trial by jury or prejudice prevention.

• Raises concerns about the power dynamics facilitated by the legal system's reliance on legislation.


Council Tax and Contract Law

• Starting small with challenging parking fines or TV licenses
• Questioning the lack of negotiation or agreement in paying council tax
• The absence of a meeting of minds, full disclosure, and signature means there is no obligation without a contract


Police Authority and Speeding Fines

• Questioning the authority behind police actions for minor infractions

• Discussing challenging speeding fines in court to assert rights under constitutional documents
• Expressing confidence in testing the system despite facing court challenges for speeding fines


Court Challenges and Legal Tactics

• Sharing experiences with challenging court proceedings related to speeding fines and clamping incidents
• Using legal tactics to challenge enforcement agents' actions regarding fines and clamping vehicles on private property

• Maintaining confidence in using legal knowledge to address situations despite facing threats from enforcement agents


Speeding fines and challenging penalties

• The interviewees discussed their experiences with receiving speeding fines and attending courses as a result.
• They highlighted the impact on their lives, including the loss of time and feeling intimidated during the process.
• Suggestions were made about writing to challenge penalties using one's own words while being cautious about potential contracts related to driving licenses.


Legislation, presumptions of law, and sovereignty

• The conversation delved into legislation, legal presumptions, and acts related to court proceedings.

• There was emphasis on understanding presumptions of law in court settings and how individuals can rebut them effectively.

• The concept of sovereignty was explored in relation to making one's own rules within their territory while respecting others' rights.


Education on sovereign rights and legal entities

• The discussion touched upon free education resources for understanding sovereignty provided by organizations like Peacekeepers.

• Different perspectives were shared regarding the term 'person' in legal contexts, including its implications as a legal fiction or corporate entity.

• Plans were made to further explore these topics through an upcoming interview with an expert from Peacekeepers.


Impact of the pandemic and abuse of power

• The pandemic has led to a moment where there has been a huge abuse of power, and people have acquiesced to it because they didn't know any different.
• Many things are being rolled out at a huge speed without public demand, such as 15-minute cities, net zeros, and digital banks.

• The pandemic has been tragic but also a gift as it has focused people on the implementation and subsequent medical interventions, waking them up.


People's perception as 'sheep' and its impact on the freedom movement

• The observation that people are perceived as 'sheep' is seen as an advantage for the freedom movement because it can create a snowball effect when more individuals start following those who lead towards freedom.
• It is believed that once everyone gets through their current situation, they can have a better life at the other side and empower themselves.
• There is recognition that calling people 'sheep' may be offensive but emphasizes how convenience has led individuals to relinquish responsibility.


Reclaiming individual responsibility in society

• Society has become reliant on big government, big tech, big pharma for almost everything instead of taking personal responsibility for their lives.

• There is an emphasis on reclaiming individual responsibility to gain control over one's life and stop living in fear.

• Once individuals realize their own power within themselves, they cannot turn back from this realization.


Keywords

  • 🚗⚖️ Legislation And Driving Offenses, 🤝 Acquiescence, 0️⃣ Net Zeros, ⚖️📜 Legal System And Legislation, 👑 Sovereignty, 💪❌ Abuse Of Power, 🏥🕊️ Health Freedom Movement, 🏛️💰 Council Tax, 👊💥 Confrontation And Conflict, ⚖️🔝 Hierarchy Of Law And Jurisdiction, 👮‍♂️🔵 Police Authority, ⚖️📜 Common Law And Constitution, 👍📜 Better Way Charter, 💻💰 Digital Banks, 🦠😷 Pandemic


Questions / Answers

  • How did Ruth influence your understanding of sovereignty?
  • She introduced me to the concept, emphasizing that we are all sovereigns governing our own bodies, minds, and spirits.


  • What was unique about Ruth's approach within the freedom movement?
  • Despite passionate voices often coming across as aggressive or arrogant in this movement, she had a gentle yet substantive approach that made people believe in her message.


  • How can individuals empower themselves through education on sovereignty?
  • By learning about common law principles such as causing no harm or loss while acting responsibly gives clarity of mind for confident action aligned with natural rights.


  • How do you push back against people who enforce certain rules or regulations?
  • The speaker advises confronting trespasses upon personal peace without escalating into conflict. They stress that avoiding confrontation can lead to larger societal issues.


  • Where does common law originate from?
  • The speaker explains that common law is derived from natural law, social contracts, customs, traditions specific to each region rather than being solely based on case law precedent.


  • How do we combat fines or summonses resulting from not obeying statutes?
  • The speaker acknowledges the challenges in standing up against fines but emphasizes the importance of understanding one's rights within a legal framework while cautioning about potential consequences.


  • Am I right in thinking that the council is a corporation posting invoices without an agreed contract?
  • Confirms that there's no negotiation or agreement involved when councils issue invoices for services without explicit contracts


  • Can life be that good if you challenge legal authorities?
  • Expresses confidence gained from challenging legal authorities through testing the system despite facing court trials


Key points & Insights

  • The significance of understanding individual sovereignty as it relates to health freedom movements.
  • The impact of gentle yet substantive advocacy within social movements like the freedom movement.
  • The empowerment potential through education on common law principles related to personal rights.
  • Individual responsibility plays a crucial role in upholding personal liberties within local communities through accountability measures.
  • Confronting trespasses upon personal peace is necessary to prevent larger societal conflicts or injustices from arising.
  • Lack of emphasis on constitutional rights in legal education raises concerns about public awareness regarding fundamental liberties underpinning common laws.
  • Challenging parking fines or TV licenses before tackling council tax can provide valuable experience before engaging with more complex issues
  • Absence of negotiation or explicit agreements questions the legitimacy behind paying certain taxes without formal contracts
  • Confidence can be gained by testing legal systems through challenges despite potential threats from enforcement agents
  • Individuals shared personal experiences with speeding fines, highlighting the impact on their lives due to attending courses, loss of time, intimidation during the process, and challenges faced when writing to challenge penalties.
  • Understanding legislation-related concepts such as presumptions of law in court settings was emphasized for effective rebuttal strategies when dealing with legal proceedings.
  • The conversation shed light on sovereignty as it relates to making one's own rules within personal territories while respecting others' rights.
  • The pandemic led to an abuse of power which awakened many individuals to question existing systems.
  • Perceiving others as 'sheep' can be advantageous for creating momentum within the freedom movement but should be approached with sensitivity due to potential offense caused by this term.
  • Reclaiming individual responsibility is crucial in gaining control over one's life rather than relying solely on external entities.


Quotes

  • We now recognize that health and sovereignty are absolutely interlinked.
  • She put things in the most simplest terms...and made you really believe that what she was saying had substance.
  • Knowing your rights gives you clarity of mind...so we can act with confidence.
  • We have our power... what I call a sovereign state of mind... so that we know what the law... are.
  • Ironically we have to fight for peace... This is all about breach... our peace.
  • It's manageable... it's less challenging because it’s on your doorstep.
  • For every obligation that you have, there must be a contracting place.
  • You are not obliged to listen to or do anything unless you want to.
  • I'm getting there... just kind of testing the system so that I can help other people.


References


Video - https://www.bitchute.com/video/VDYZG1kfKgAc/


Video Transcript

(NOTE: created by AI and unedited for errors)


RIP Ruth-Replay interview w Ruth Skölmli-Your Rights in Plain English


Date 2024-03-12

Richard 00:00

Hello and welcome back to the channel and thank you for joining us today. In the last few days, a lovely, beautiful sovereign lady who has been part of the Freedom and the Truth movement, although in a very sort of background position, I would say has unfortunately and sadly passed. And she was a great friend of Tess Laurie who's joining me now to talk about the very lovely who I met a couple of times in real life and interviewed on this show. Ruth Scholey, Tess. Thank you for joining me in this little tribute that we've put together.

Tess 00:35

Well Richard, thank you so much for inviting me to speak about Ruth. You know she really introduced me and World Council for Health to the word sovereignty. Before I met Ruth I used to think you know, a sovereign was a gold coin or you know something related to the royal family. And I never really realised that we were sovereign and what that meant means self determining, self determination. And Ruth explained, although it was hard to believe, that, you know, we were all actually sovereigns, kings and Queens of our own territory, our territory being our own bodies, our minds and our spirits. So you know, I can't really overstate what a contribution she's made to the health freedom movement, because we now recognize that health and sovereignty are absolutely interlinked. You cannot achieve optimal health without being sovereign and having being able to self determine and make your own choices. So this is a little one of our slides that we are used and explaining to people what the World Council for Health is about. And so among our slides we have this slide. We promote sovereignty. And what this means, based on what we learned from Ruth, is that we manage ourselves and solve our own problems. We don't take orders from others. We govern ourselves. We're our own land and our own territory. We act on our conscience and know right from wrong and we live in harmony with nature. And that being sovereign is how we create, thrive and evolve. Ruth's influence also extends to our Better Way Charter, because the you know, we have 7 principles of the Better way. And the first principle is we act and honour and we do no harm. So I encourage people to look at that on the website. There's seven principles, but the first one is we act and honour and do no harm. And of course Ruth was the first person to say, you know, we do our best to live by this. You know, we all make mistakes and they and when we make them, we correct them. But we we've set out to do no harm to others or our environment and notably on Ruth's Fiery with her resoluteness on our fundamental human rights. We have at the very end of the Charter as a as a footnote that we do not tolerate the violation of an alienable rights and freedoms. Now you know many people say that we've got there with courage. We do not tolerate the violation of inalienable rights and freedoms and we don't tolerate profit, power and influence coming before the well-being of people and the planet. Now so many people have said so. Well, how do you enforce that and how do you expect to enforce? It's not AS, but that's exactly the position we have to take. We don't need to be afraid. It's about standing up for truth and justice and actually you know, putting your ethics up front and really not putting the consequences before the ethics and Ruth was you know, you might think well she was she must have been really, you know, such a strong a brave person where she was a strong brave person but you know she was terrified of public speaking and you know, and actually quite timid in herself. But she did not compromise on her on the truth and on justice. And you know she was a real warrior gentle warrior for justice. So you know, if she had, if a bailiff was at the door or if she had to go, you know she would, she would go to court to defend an unlawful fine. She was nervous as anything, you know, her heart would be fluttering and but she would do it, you know, and she would do it on her own and very bravely and with conviction, you know, So she's such, she's such a great example for us all. You know, you don't have to. You know, brave person is really someone who has the courage of their convictions and she was really super brave.

Richard 05:04

She was very lovely to talk to. When I interviewed her last year in 2023 there were so many people who are very extremely passionate and vocal about sovereignty, freedom and the truth movement and very often that can come over a little bit aggressive or arrogant. But what Ruth was not and she was, she put things in the most simplest and easiest terms and was very gentle, as we're going to play in the full interview that I did with her in a minute and people will be able to see that for themselves. And so it was lovely to see other people other than what you do often see on YouTube or on the other channels. These people who are who you know have the knowledge and the truth to put out there. But sometimes it can come over a bit harshly. Whereas she was extremely gentle and made you really believe that what she was saying had substance.

Tess 06:02

She really wanted to share with people and empower them, you know, And she put together this wonderful course. It's got 10 modules, sorry, 10 minute. They're sort of 10 minute modules. So it's really accessible. And it's on her. She has a website called Sovereign Natural empowerment.com I think it is.

Richard 06:22

Something the link in the.

Tess 06:23

++++++ Description But you know, she really explains it so clearly. And that was all she wanted to do. So she's left this amazing legacy in terms of the course as well. And I strongly encourage people to do it. You know, it's really for everybody, children, men and women. It's everybody should do it and become sovereign.


Interview Starts


Richard 06:47

Absolutely and we are sovereign people and we need to make sure that we are in our own sovereign standing. Shall we go and watch the video? Now Play it in. And ladies and gentlemen, you can see what a lovely lady that Ruth scolded me was. Hello, and welcome back to the channel and thank you for joining me in another of my interview series. Today we're going to be talking about common law, and you've heard me talk about this and I'm learning all the time. When I realised I needed to speak to somebody who knew a hell of a lot more and spent a long time exploring what common law is and what the other laws that we think we understand is the acts and statutes and legalese and all of that is actually about. So let's bring on my guest today, which is Ruth Schonely, Scholarly Ruth, it's very nice to have you on the show. Sorry about I practised your name there. It's not an English name, and I'm not very good when it's a different country where what's? Where's Gormley from?

Ruth 07:51

That's Norwegian.

Richard 07:52

Richard, you know, yes, that's right.

Ruth 07:54

My husband's fault.

Richard 07:55

Fantastic but it's a lovely name. It's a lovely name. So, Ruth, welcome to the show. Thank you very much for coming and agreeing to talk to me about common law and the hierarchy of law as well, because we all think that we are under the spell of what the government legislates and tells us that we have to do. But as I've been exploring in my videos, it seems to be that's not really the case.

Ruth 08:28

No, Richard, the i just mentioned to you earlier that I did go to law school and I spent quite a few years there. And what I've realised since in the last couple of years is what we're taught at law school is not law at all. We're taught about legislation, we're taught about statutes. We believe that that's all you know the most important thing about law, but actually the law is very simple and you don't need to go to law school for three years. You can learn it in 5 minutes.

Richard 09:00

Which? You know well, but please do I am now your pupil.

Ruth 09:05

Alright, so the law instead of millions of pieces of legislation, statutes, orders, regulations, rules, all of that kind of thing. It's very simple. It's just we cause no harm, no loss, no injury. I'm sure you've heard that before. We have to act responsibly and proportionately in all the circumstances. So responsibility responsibly and proportionately that can give you lawful excuse to cause harm because there may be circumstances where you have to. For example, a doctor may need to cause harm to fix somebody if somebody's if it's an emergency or if a house is burning down, you might have to break through the door to get people out. So that's your lawful excuse to cause harm. But otherwise we cause no harm, no loss, no injury. We are honourable in our contracts and we have to know that our rights end where another persons begins. So I can easily teach your rights as well. That's very simple too. And knowing the law and knowing your rights gives you a clarity of mind, removes all the clouds and the befuddlement that we are living under and give us clarity of mind so that we can act and act with confidence and courage, because we know what we're doing and we know we're doing the right thing.

Richard 10:24

Well, I'd love to know what my rights are then, having now got my degree in law, in the law. Thank you very much, Ruth. what? What are our rights, Our inanely inalienable rights, presumably.

Ruth 10:40

While I pronounced it inalienable just to make it even more confusing.

Richard 10:44

But a lot of people would say I struggled to say the first version. So yeah, I struggle sometimes.

Ruth 10:50

Some people say in inalienable, right?

Richard 10:54

Yes.

Ruth 10:54

I say inalienable but visible I won't get into that right now it.

Richard 10:59

Does is that because of the lean part of it? Yeah, that's what I've heard that that's a technical term, as it were. Or yeah, there's etymology behind it, I suppose.

Ruth 11:09

Yes, and it just helps me to remember. And yeah, just make us sound like aliens anyway. But I know what you mean. I know. So there's inalienable rights and there's also all the other rights that you have. So you're in alienable rights. I just see it as those that you need to first of all exist because they are part of natural law. That's how we exist then how we survive, how we stay alive and also how we thrive. So we need water, we need food, we need clean air to breathe, we need to be able to protect ourselves, to self defence. We need shelter, you know, from the elements and all those sorts of things, bodily autonomy, so that no one can touch them if we don't want them to. So these are inalienable rights and then everything else, all the other rights is everything. That's not wrong. So we're wrong. So you're the law is to cause no harm, no loss, no injury, and that's the wrong to do that. So if you're not doing any of those things, everything else is, you're right. It's as simple as that.

Richard 12:22

Yeah, so you can do powering, isn't it?

Ruth 12:25

Certainly embarrassing. Get embarrassing. Empowering gets rid of all of the clouds in your mind of what's the right, what's wrong? What can I do to protect myself? What can't I do to protect myself? Too much force, too little force. If you need to protect yourself, you have to be able to be confidence that you can do what you need to do and not worry about reasonable force and all those idiosyncrasies that go come with the with the legislature. So that's what confuses us. Things that we see on the media confuses our education system, confuses us. But all we need to know is what is the law, what are our rights and we can do anything that we want to do within the.

Richard 13:10

So it's by the fact that it is so simple that it that that's especially in days like today where everything is complicated. We have this natural feeling or maybe it's not natural, but we've this tendency to think it can't be that easy that things are. You know, you have to go to law school surely to go for three or four years to understand all this stuff so that you can, you know, work it all out. But you you've just put that over in a couple of minutes and there we go. You could teach that to a child. They understand that they're going to grow up the rest of their lives. They can choose to do no harm if they wish, and then if they do some harm, there are obviously consequences. But they would soon learn. Oh, actually, it's probably better just to, you know, I've got so many rights, got so much freedom. I've got so many things I can do. What an amazing thing and what an amazing world.

Ruth 14:09

We live in when you're like that.

Richard 14:12

Exactly. Because nobody's damaging the world or making us restricted and paying huge taxes and keeping us down. So tell me just.

Ruth 14:23

Become very creative. You use your creativity and that's how we thrive, that our creativity is completely just as complete lid on it.

Richard 14:34

Yes, stifles.

Ruth 14:35

So scared to move.

Richard 14:38

Which is. I mean this is the thing. So I mean, I've been talking about elements of this, not with huge knowledge about it, but as you start talking about it, it's it, you know, it percolates or it's been percolating my brain. And you start to think actually, yes, no, I am empowered by this. But then you see the restrictions, the council tax thing comes in, a parking ticket comes in. You're told that you can't go down here, there's a stop sign here. You know, all that sort of machinations of government start to sort of compound you and you go, but nobody's going to believe me if I say, but these are my rights or you can't do this to me. So how do we combat the very fixed, very rigid world that we find ourselves in?

Ruth 15:27

Well, at the moment we we're kind of focused on for the right reasons. I mean, we're really focused on The Who, what they're up to, the World Economic Forum, the elite, all of these things that are going on, big things going on around us. And we want to stop that. Well, it's the same kind of thing with all the things going on around us locally. That's where we have our power. When we get into this, what I call a sovereign state of mind, Clear mind, clarity of mind, so that we know what the law and our rights are. We must hold. Responsibility comes with that power, so we must hold people to account who are around us. That's all we can actually do. There's no point wasting our time writing letters to people who will never meet. Deal with the people who are around you. That's my advice anyway, and what I try to do, hold them to account when they are committing wrong. Doesn't matter how small it is. If they're asking you to wear a mask, they're making a claim in a way that you must wear a mask because you have to protect other people or it's for your own protection. Or make them prove that claim. If they're claiming that, they have to prove that claim otherwise, because that's your inalienable right to breathe fresh air. So they're trying to take that away from you. So make them prove it, don't just let them get away with it. Even if it's a shopkeeper and you think, oh, I can't be bothered to go to that, then I'll just go to another one. Now hold them to account and stop them from doing it. And when they are stopped, it's it kind of, it's a domino effect. You have the small domino after you've ever seen that image where there's a tiny domino that knocks over a bigger and bigger and bigger one, and at the end it knocks over a giant domino. That's what we have to kind of envisage when we're doing our notices or writing a letter to people or asking someone verbally to please, you know, prove your claim and don't do that. We are that small domino and we're going to knock over the great big dominos when we when we do that.

Richard 17:27

And I suppose when you knock over the little, when you knock over the first domino, that's the biggest point of effort, isn't it? Because the rest are going by the inertia of that initial push. And if that push is just enough, the tip, you know, you get to the tipping point and then it just carries on and you no longer having to do the pushing. It's just that the results are amazing as a result of that first push yeah And how do you push back against people? You know, you'll say, for example, you know, they'll say, well, you've got to wear a mask and you'll say, well that's a claim and prove it. And they say, well, you know, the government told us or it's on the BBC or scientists have proved all this sort of stuff. How do you get over that challenge that you're challenge back where you go? Because a lot of people do find confrontation quite difficult.

Ruth 18:22

Well, we ironically, this is another part of my i do, I do courses, you know, short and the day courses. And that's another part of it is that we ironically, we have to fight for peace. This is all about breach of our peace. By the way. This is all a trespass. Everything's a trespass upon us and it's trespass and that breaches your peace. And we are entitled to live in peace. That's another inalienable right. So these are all trespasses and breaches of our peace. So ironically, we have to fight for peace. That's what we have to do. And if we don't get into confrontation and we don't get into conflict, which we're taught to not do, there's a good reason for that. People don't want us to because we'll solve all the world's problems if we do that.

Richard 19:07

Yes.

Ruth 19:08

Because if you let a small thing go that can escalate eventually into war. That's how big it can become.

Richard 19:15

As we're seeing at the moment, yeah.

Ruth 19:17

Exactly. So when you are dealing with your people who are in front of you, it's you and them. It's not you against the corporation or anyone. They work for you. And if they're making the claim, they are responsible for making that claim and you have to hold them responsible. So it is it is individual to individual. I, Karen, ruth will be will be holding Richard to account. If you ask me to wear a mask, nobody else. Just you. And that's how you deal with that. And if they say that it's the government telling you to do this, they have to do their own due diligence. If they are reinforcing what they are being asked to do, you don't just follow orders. It's not an excuse to follow orders. So they have to do their own due diligence. And if they're carrying on and asking you to do this and that, then they are responsible for their actions. You're responsible for your own actions and emissions in life and.

Richard 20:17

So it's yeah it's just do you find though that I mean although you've just told me all of this and I'm very much on The same wavelength that you find that people on your courses or when you do this in the real world as it were, that people find this very difficult. This because of the indoctrination that we've had for years and years and years, our entire lived experience has been indoctrinated. And so this sense of liberty and or freedom rather, is quite difficult to grasp for people, even though it's ours and it's a simple concept.

Ruth 20:57

Very much so, yes. But generally, the people who are coming to the courses, they are halfway there already because they realise that something's wrong. Yes. So they're the easy ones to work with because they want to be able to do something about it. It's the others that are more difficult. We don't want to judge people we've been taught not to, We don't want to confront, and we don't want to conflict. You hear so much about i hate confrontation. You hear that all the time. Well, we have to do. Because if we don't do it, who's going to do it? We're going to leave it. Even if we think well, the army are there it ultimately to help us. Well, why should it be a man or a woman's job in the Army? You know, they're only people like we are, so we should do our bit.

Richard 21:46

So it's quite interesting because you're what you're in some ways you're saying that although there are these government bodies that are dictating stuff, we don't have to deal with them particularly unless of course it's you know someone from the government who's actually come to the door or is there in front of us. But ultimately they are just another living person who is giving you an instruction and so. But you don't have to necessarily deal with the huge bureaucracy. You're dealing with your neighbours and friends and people that you encounter in an everyday life, which makes it seem less what's the word I'm looking for, You know, it's less of a problem to do than if you know less of a challenge because.

Ruth 22:36

You're manageable.

Richard 22:37

It's manageable. There you go. And I knew there was a word out there.

Ruth 22:40

It's manageable and that's on your doorstep. So you might have a few days where you don't have any encounters and then you might have a day where you think, gosh, that's too much in one day. But we have to just do what we can. And Richard, nature requires balance. So where This is why we're in chaos, because people aren't doing enough to correct the wrongs. So in nature, if there's a wrong, there has to be a right. That's equity. So we have to we have to do our bit to correct the wrongs. By just doing a right, even if you feel like you're getting nowhere, you're putting a right into nature and that will help to balance everything out. So the more of us doing it, yes, You know, we will eventually balance and that's where we're getting to now this message that I'm trying to give that William keeps giving. And didn't you have Edward Fitzgerald on as well? I did yeah OK. He's also, you know, there's many of us now doing the same message and it's getting across. People are starting to hear it now more. Sorry, go.

Richard 23:49

Ahead yeah. No, I was just going to ask. So if we go back to these the common law, where does that originate from?

Ruth 23:58

Well, this is another confusion because when you go to law school, you're taught that common law is case law. Well, there's an element of common law in the case law that it's still judge made law. That's a man or woman who's kind of part of the government, although it's a separate branch, the judiciary, they are making that law by interpreting legislation towards the facts of the case. So that's another misconception about what common law is. So it depends what we're actually talking about with common law. Now I see common law as law of the land that's derived from natural law, from nature and it's art, how people interact with each other. That's what common laws built up from. That's our social contract. And also in different parts of the world and different lands you have customs and traditions. So to me the common law that when I mentioned common law, it's common law of the land which encompasses the social contract derived from natural law together with our customs and traditions in So for example I'm in Devon here and we have cream and jam on our scones. I'm making a trivial point here, an income.

Richard 25:16

You're making me hungry though, now sorry.

Ruth 25:19

It is lunchtime in Cornwall. The jam and the cream go on the other way. Yes. So right, that's a that's a custom tradition kind of thing. So we all have our own different bits and pieces and that's what makes us unique and a bit more interesting. Umm, in our lands. That's what the common law is to me and many other people that, you know, try to give this message out. Now, it's not the case law precedent that is made by a man or a woman in a courtroom.

Richard 25:50

That is one size fits everybody.

Ruth 25:52

Yes.

Richard 25:53

Because as you just said, you know in Devon, you're doing your jam and cream one way and the Cornish are deciding, well, that's all right for you and you're welcome to do that. But we do it this way because that's our tradition, the custom, It's not a dictat from a government saying cream and jam must go this way, which effectively what the laws are saying. So how is it that we have these statutes and acts that we all obey? I was going to say religiously there, but it's kind of religious, isn't it? We obey these things, fearing the consequences, and there are consequences given to us if we don't.

Ruth 26:31

Well, another thing we weren't taught at law school is the thing that William keeps mentions very much and that's our constitution, that we have a very strong constitution. It's made out of several documents. I have a couple of slides which are if you if I can share my screen I don't need to do it just at this.

Richard 26:48

Second, OK, sorry, I'll do it. No that's all right. I may fiddle with the controls to do that, but we'll do it.

Ruth 26:57

I'm not very good at this technical stuff either, so, and I'm not saying you're not good, I'm.

Richard 27:02

No i just, I don't know. I just press buttons and see what happens.

Ruth 27:08

So the Constitution, our Bill of Rights and various other documents, they tell us that we can suffer no fines or forfeitures without trial by jury of our peers and we cannot be prejudiced in any way and we're not taught that, that's kind of glossed over, you know, even at law school, so.

Richard 27:30

We don't know yet even at law school as potential barristers lawyers solicitors and all of that you so that must be sorry to interrupt you. I'm just thinking so that anybody going to a lawyer or a barrister or whatever with the case and he's saying, but I have this thing called common law, we should have trial by jury. We have the constitution. I guess a mist must go over there, head thinking. You're just talking mythological nonsense from their perspective, yeah?

Ruth 28:00

That's exactly what happens and I think that's why we have a little problem in the magistrates courts and things like that because they just think when we are going in there and trying to challenge them that we're talking absolutely rubbish. And you know, obviously I have some solicitor friends, they don't they believe that common law's case law that it has no power because we're not getting to that level of understanding and they don't. Well, why would they want to know that's the end of their beliefs in what they've been doing for all of those years and what they've invested into. Yes. So it's.

Richard 28:33

Extremely financial and they're financial reward, of course.

Ruth 28:37

I suppose so. I mean, obviously there's a few who've realised and they're trying to speak out as well. But you really are up against it because it's a gigantic system and the legal system and the legislation is what holds everything and facilitates everything that's happened to us over the last three years. You think about it facilitates all the medical industry, that Pharmaceutical industry. It facilitates the fear that we have and the control over us. It's facilitated, you know, the Coronavirus Act and you can do this and could do that system has facilitated everything. It's very powerful.

Richard 29:12

So how do we combat that? Because you know, if you don't obey the statutes and the acts, you start getting fines. You start getting summonses, which is an invitation to go and to the Magistrates Court, to basically plead your case and then end up paying the fine under whatever circumstances. You can beg the be straight to permit you, I suppose, and yet that's wrong.

Ruth 29:42

That is wrong. I think my advice would be because you can come and massive cropper, believe me I have learnt you. It's very hard to stand there in your confidence and get your message across. So you have to start quite small. Maybe start with a parking fine and see how you go or the TV licence and do something like that. That's a little bit easier to deal with before you start going in with council tax because the council tax, which is you know you're not obliged to pay it but it's they will make it extremely difficult for you to get away with that and I've been into court and faced the magistrates with that one. It's extremely difficult, but we just keep doing it, just keep doing.

Richard 30:27

It and just using that as an example, which I know is a is a juggernaut of a thing. Am I right in thinking that the council is a corporation and that they've effectively posted through your letterbox an invoice for something and saying please, will you pay us. But there's no contract. You've not agreed to it. You've not said actually i yeah, that's a good idea quite like that. I can have my bins collected. There's the fire brigade if my house comes on fire or it gets on fire and the police and you know and the street lights and what have you. But you've not agreed with them or negotiated and said, well, actually the street lights could I have them a bit dimmer outside my house And I don't want the LED ones and I'd rather not have 5G and I'm not really happy with the sort of wages that you're paying at this great big building. So there seems to be if you were doing a contract with a body that was going to take your bins and provide the fire, there would be a lot of negotiation going on that you would do. But they just post something through your letterbox with the expectation that you're just going to cough up at A some that they've decided that you have no agreement to and you just start paying it. But there's no contract and it and I understand there's sort of four pillars of contract law that you know has not been agreed to at all.

Ruth 31:55

No. So there's no meeting of the minds. There's no Full disclosure. You know, there's no signature and there's nobody signed anything. And without a contract there is. You can have no obligation. For every obligation that you have, there must be a contracting place. It doesn't matter what kind of obligation it is. Council tax or, you know, a policeman asking you to do something. You know where's your contract. You are not obliged to listen to or do anything you know. You think about your rights. No one can make you do anything unless you want to. And that would be your agreement, which becomes a contract Everything's about.

Richard 32:34

Policemen was to stop you know, just to stop you because I don't know a light was out on your car or you went 2 miles an hour over and they said stop here. I was under the belief that you would be able to turn round to him and say, you know, very nice to meet you hello. But where's the crime? You know you've prevented me from going on my travelling in my convenience and my conveyance but where's the where's the crime you know. And they said, well your tail lights out or your you know this that you're going faster than the designated area. But if there's no harm to a another living person there is no actual crime you might sort of take into consideration. Well thank you for the advice about the light. I'll, you know i'll make amends in my own time thank you very much. But that you could be fined for these things would be a completely different agreement and if you would, if you were to say yeah, OK, I'll I will consent with you or I will contract with you to pay you some money, then that's again, that's different. You have to have a contract for that to happen, but you might not want to pay.

Ruth 33:51

No no one can demand money from you without a contract because you have no obligation without a contract. Now with the your a light being out, for example, it might be reasonable and proportionate for you to have that light fixed while you're driving down the road so that everyone can see you know when you're going to break or whatever like that. So yes, you must go and get that fixed. And as you say, it would be reasonable for the police say officer, Well, it would be there's a difference between a police. The constable would say to you, that's fair enough, go and get it fixed. Have a nice day yeah and take your word for it. The office would try to find you, find you. It's the same person, but they're one of them's acting outside of their oath and the other ones acting within their oath to protect and serve people, keep the peace and do whatever they need to do to help us. The officer is more of a revenue generating or gathering sort of employee, and they'll do everything they can to find you. So he wouldn't take your word for it and give you a fine anyway, but the constable would understand that it was a perfect, an honest mistake and that you're going to get it fixed.

Richard 35:03

So.

Ruth 35:03

The speed, sorry, go.

Richard 35:04

Ahead no go on to do the speed.

Ruth 35:06

One, well, the speeding. We've got a few of these now. I mean, I'm in my sixties now and I have become a bit of a, you know, I used to just do everything by the book and now. No, not so much anymore. You're a bit of a rebel, are you? I'm getting there. Just kind of testing the system so that I can help other people.

Richard 35:27

Absolutely and it gives you authority as well, doesn't it? You know, if you're testing the system and you know you've done it. I've got a friend of mine who's constantly telling me. He says, well, i'm out the system. I'm not in it anymore. I I've done it. I've been there a night. And that confidence grows the more you do this, presumably. So yeah, sorry, I interrupted about the speeding.

Ruth 35:46

Well, the speeding remind me to tell you about my clamp before we finish. Yes. So there's speeding, you know lorna, you have, you've caused no harm, no loss, no injury to anybody, You have no contract with anyone. So, and you know that the Bill of Rights and other constitutional documents tell you that there can be no fines and no forfeitures, and you cannot be prejudiced without before you've been convicted at trial by a jury of your peers. So how can this man or woman standing in front of you in fancy dress? They also have to have some fancy dress, including the, you know, the judges in the courtrooms. They all have to wear these outfits so that we ironically believe them. It's a bit of a stage show.

Richard 36:34

It's all theatre isn't.

Ruth 36:36

It it's all theatre, but of course they don't know that they're doing that they're. I do believe people believe they're doing everything for the right reason. So it's not a personal thing, it's just education trying to educate. So how can they find you for doing a couple of you know, you didn't hurt anyone, So what actually was the harm that you caused? But it doesn't always work. And you know, I'm in court in a couple of months time, it was supposed to be the nineteenth of may, but they've just told announced to me that they're moving that date where I'm gonna try and challenge this. So I don't know how I'll get on, but I'm trying to build up my knowledge by testing the system and I will be in front of apparently I'm getting a full trial, which is not a trial by jury. I've tried to get that, but I'm going to get a three panel magistrates and potentially a District Judge. So that will be very interesting to see how.

Richard 37:34

And does that sort of are you nervous about that?

Ruth 37:37

No, not at all. I I've been terrified all my life with first of all speaking in public and all my nerves. Everything's gone. I have no, I've never been as confident in my. I'm not saying I am every single day, but most of the time I feel like I've never felt before, so.

Richard 37:55

It's wonderful and that's I mean you know this is the thing because people I think watching this some people some people will have a vague notion of it because they've been watching what have been saying and I've been exploring this and testing the reaction and seeing the comments and what have you. But some people will be watching this for the very first time, of course, or they've been cautiously thinking, I think that Vogues blokes a bit mad and they could well be right, of course, on that note. And so some people will be going is this, can this be, can life be that good and it really be true. Tell us about your clamp.

Ruth 38:33

Right what was the camp for? I think that was a speeding ticket as well. I didn't go to court because I didn't know better at the time, right? So I had a clamp put on my car at twenty eighth of November last year and it came off on Valentine's Day so it was there for 70 odd days wow and I luckily we had two cars at the time so I could we only have the one now, but.

Richard 38:59

Was it? Was it clamped on The road somewhere away from where you live?

Ruth 39:02

My drive.

Richard 39:03

Which is also on your drive.

Ruth 39:05

Which is another no but they don't care. He didn't have a summons, he didn't have a warrant. He sorry, he didn't have a warrant of control, he didn't have anything he was supposed to have. So I just kept using letters and letters and letters and got to the point where I was taking them to court and then overnight the clamp suddenly disappeared. But in the meantime, because you know you have a little bit of fun with it. As well as charging five hundred pounds an hour for that clamp, so the built and plus two hundred and fifty thousand pounds to trust us in the 1st place, which I had noticed them before they came to my house. So the bill was over a million pounds by that time. So I'm just waiting for them to settle that bill. They haven't done so.

Richard 39:52

Yeah is that why I'm not talking to you from the Bahamas or somewhere like that?

Ruth 39:56

I wouldn't have my willies on.

Richard 39:58

No, absolutely. So I what I don't understand is why did they clamp it on your drive? What was the possible reason they would be clamping your vehicle or your conveyance, I suppose I ought to say. On your own property.

Ruth 40:14

Well, that's a good point because it's not my own. It's a lease car. So there's two things they did wrong. One, they came on my property and did it, and second, it was the least cost, so it's not even mine. So they took control of somebody else's property. So I've just spent a lot of time writing to them and pointing this out. But it again, I'm testing the system, so I'm building up my confidence by doing that. And they kept threatening me to come back and break into my house with the locks, locksmith and all of these kinds of things, which is terrifying. But knowing that you've got the law on your side just kept cool, kept calm, kept just plugging away at it. And eventually they had to just come back with their tail between their legs and take that off. Even though they were telling me that a judge had allowed them to come to my they hadn't. So they will tell you.

Richard 41:02

Yeah, So what? What was the real I mean speeding oh, it was the speeding. And because you didn't pay, they thought would clamp your car.

Ruth 41:09

I didn't go to court, so when you don't, I didn't know any better. I should have gone to court, but I didn't know at that time. That's why I'm going to court next time for the next one the fine of I don't know 40 or 50 pounds became eight hundred and something pounds got and then the I won't name the enforcement agents they add their bill on so that becomes over a thousand pounds for doing forty seven in a 40 well when it was a dual carriageway and there was nobody else on the road.

Richard 41:41

Yes, and we've all, I mean we've all done, you know I've done plenty of these sort of tiny little misdemeanours. You look at, you're looking up at something and or someone's talking to you or whatever it is or your or you're being careful of something and you suddenly realised, i've just in order to do that to avert some other danger. I've gone a little bit faster to get round there and the lumen speed entrapment camera, which is a, you know, a horrible thing in and of itself which can cause you a bit and blaming there's another blooming camera. We've all done that. You know, We've all done it. And we've all felt it was unfair because there was no, it's not like you were driving dangerously at like, you know, in a 30 mile an hour going 80 and just for the for the kicks, Yeah. Which could of course be dangerous. And then that's not responsible, is it? And it's not reasonable.

Ruth 42:33

No, exactly. And that's the law. You know you have to act responsibly. And i didn't harm anyone. There was no chance of harming anybody. And I think where the, if I remember where it might have been, there wasn't even any residential area there. So they couldn't be a possibility of anybody walking around either. So very i'm not on ferries just again, you're right, you know, you're allowed to travel and we're all responsible. I've been driving for 43 years. You can make those judgments yourself.

Richard 43:05

And I suppose at the very, the very worst really is that somebody would write to you and say we notice you went a bit faster than the speed limit, just to let you know. That is the sort of it's the safest speed to go. And you could just say, OK, thanks very much for the observation. You know, it's not really none of your business, but I'll take it on board and you can be very polite and honourable about it, but that really is about the limit of what should have happened really, isn't it?

Ruth 43:30

Yeah, it should be. That would be a reasonable thing to do.

Richard 43:33

Because if you're using that particular bit of you know, dual carriageway and maybe the signage isn't good or whatever it is, you might go, i just didn't. I mean I did that going down to see my son one Christmas and it was dual carriageway in Southampton and everyone was going reasonably fast and there was just going in the pace thinking that this was a it was a safe speed. It was 40 in a in a 30 and I was probably going about 38 maybe because I wasn't not trying to go over 40 and I was with the children going down to see my eldest son and the next thing is like, there's a speed camera. blimey and of course then it came and you think OK if that had just been by the way that's a that's a 30 not a 40. You go, OK, fair enough. I'll bear that in mind next time you would have you know. But no there was no harm. There was nobody in the way and you know it was well fenced off from the public, but you know they made, they made money out of it and you went on and I went on one of the courses to tell me I was a naughty person for going a little faster than I should have done.

Ruth 44:42

And they probably made a little bit more money out of you for doing that.

Richard 44:45

Yes, absolutely. Well, they took a day of my life away, as it were, to do the course as well as paying for it and intimidating me to make me feel that I was a stupid person. And you know all those sort of, you know, threats and menaces which you just don't need.

Ruth 45:03

No.

Richard 45:03

In your in your life. So yeah, so that so what do we do though, because you mentioned writing and that seems to be a now a friend of mine, he's a very much a writer. He likes to introduce himself. He's very honourable, but he's very firm and he says I, you know, and he starts to state what the situation should be and how they have mistreated him. And he he's sure it's all going to be sorted out, but he uses the written word, the pen, as the as the tool to get back at them. Because effectively that's what they're doing to you, isn't it? With their notices of penalties and fines and summonses.

Ruth 45:44

Yeah, it can be very difficult to write to, especially when you've got a summons because they're they are frightening. That's what the design is, to frighten you and make you feel fearful. But you know, if you know the law and what they are and aren't allowed to, that they're acting under legislation that doesn't apply to you know, I know I've heard you say that, Richard, that you know about that now and that's a really difficult one to get to grips with. That legislation does not apply to us unless we consent to it. And you can consent by, you know by not objecting to it as well. So you it's a bit of a minefield, you've got to be careful and there's also with driving there's also the potential contracts that you have with your driving licence. So there's a lot of mind feels with driving and I would not start your processes of fighting back or trying to test the system with a driving offence because they are really hard to negotiate. And you do end up in court very quickly.

Richard 46:54

Yes. So you don't. You don't want to get into court too quickly until you're really confident and you've got a knowledge base of how to deal with the legislative process.

Ruth 47:07

And at starting just by writing, you know your own words that just never write anything that you cannot back up. Never make a statement in writing or verbally that you cannot hundred percent % with your own proof or evidence. You can ask questions that's completely different because asking a question you're looking for information and then they have to back up what they say. So try and word it. Question like, you know why? Have you sort of done what you've just done? But you don't have to write in any template form. You can just write your own words, your own unique way. You don't have to be brilliantly clever or anything like that. I certainly am not just what happened and what have they done? And just that, you know, just write that down in your own way. And if you start following templates, that can get to the point where they have an automatic response because they're seeing this template all the time yeah so every time we write in our own way, they have to really think about their response and it's a bit harder for them. So they can learn to deal with the template, but they can't learn to deal with us as unique individuals. So it's best to use your creativity.

Richard 48:25

One of the things that I've learned is that in legislation, in the legal statutes and acts, or in court, there are 12 presumptions of law. And these presumptions mean that they will assume a 12 things about you that you. But they don't tell you what these things are. So you don't know. So as you go into court, unless you rebut them and say by the way, these 12 presumptions don't actually apply by me. You have then not given a contract and there's a it seems to be a weird way that they'll say well as soon as you step into the court or answer our letters unless you've actually said no to these things you've contracted with us and so but once you know that very simple thing and you can say oh by the way I don't I I'm rebutting the 12 presumptions of law which are this and this. They don't apply to me by the way thank you very much for offering them very nice of you. Very kind very enticing. But i they don't apply to me because that's not the law. Is that? Is that fair? Is that?

Ruth 49:36

I think I'm going to be a little bit pedantic here. We think there are 12 presumptions. How do we know there aren't 15 or 20? So we aren't told everything. This is the occult. By a cult I mean secret not, you know what we believe are cultures. So I would just say I rebut all presumptions you may have about.

Richard 49:57

Yes, very good.

Ruth 49:58

We don't know how many they might there might be.

Richard 50:01

There might, yes. No, I hadn't thought of that. It's very good. I like.

Ruth 50:04

That it's well worth saying, because if there aren't any or there are 100 then you know it doesn't do any harm to say that.

Richard 50:12

No, Yes, absolutely I.

Ruth 50:13

Don't think all of